What’s called ‘messaging,’ in the PR business, can be terribly evocative and convincing. That’s often the problem with it, when the words folks are reading, and hearing, focus only on the upsides — on all the positive sides of something — when there may be some downsides, as well, to be aware of.
Case in point… an architect’s messaging in favor of a proposed new, and potentially oversized, building, that’s under consideration for the currently vacant lot at 232 Pagosa Street. I’ve been following this proposed development, in Daily Post editor Bill Hudson’s editorial series.
On behalf of one of the firms seeking to develop the site, Reynolds Ash & Associates, architect Lauren Davis had some evocative, convincing words in her messaging, emphasizing upsides, as might be expected, such as…
We have the ability to build smarter, to build to higher standards, to use new materials and methods that allow for new development to do more for a growing community…
…and messaging highlighting social connections for people downtown, and about a local team dedicated to making ‘232 Pagosa Street’ a beautiful destination, and about the project bringing vitality to the East Village downtown area, and messaging about the proposed building encouraging synergy with the mixed uses, supporting other local businesses and avoiding sprawl with infill development.
Because the architect’s messaging is so evocative and convincing, you folks out your way have to be especially careful of it, because it easily can slip up on you, and make you feel perfectly okay, and even sanguine enough to consider only the upsides, without taking downsides into account.
That’s what often happens… and then you’re maybe missing something, and some deal is finalized, when you perhaps aren’t entirely sure what the deal is really all about.
And as it turns out, in this case, with the 232 Pagosa Street proposal, it’s the back of the proposed building that may very well be a different story for folks residing in the residential neighborhood, right behind where the new building would be built. The back of the building, it seems, might be less stylish than the front of the building? And maybe not so appealing for the folks living close by… and behind?
That’s the problem with messaging, when some things are emphasized, and some things, maybe, are left out.